Posted on 01/22/2009 1:12:40 PM PST by NYer
DC (LifeNews.com) -- In a move to downplay his pro-abortion agenda, President Barack Obama has decided to wait a little longer to reverse a Bush policy preventing taxpayer funding of abortions overseas. The Mexico City Policy prevents sending public funds to groups that perform or promote abortions in other countries.
The new president could either issue an order tomorrow or in the near future to reverse the policy or allow Congress to do it.
Obama was expected to overturn the pro-life policy on his first or second full days in office and to possibly do so today, on the anniversary of the Roe v. Wade decision.
However, a CBN News report indicates Obama will not overturn the policy on a day that pro-life advocates mourn the Supreme Court allowing virtually unlimited abortions.
While Obama is still expected to fund foreign abortions at some point, CBN News indicates Obama is attempting to camouflage his pro-abortion agenda by issuing a statement calling for efforts to reduce abortions.
"It is unclear whether Obama intends to reverse the Mexico City Policy at some point in the future but this reliable source tells me that this move signals that Obama will stress the need for reducing abortions in this country rather than focus on the divisive tit for tat policy reversals of the past," writes David Brody a senior correspondent for the network.
The move may infuriate pro-abortion groups, which campaigned relentlessly for Obama and expected him to immediately reverse the policy upon taking over the White House.
At the same time, Obama could approach overturning the Mexico City Policy in the same manner as he is apparently approaching reversing Bush's limits on funding embryonic stem cell research.
Obama appears to want Congress to do the heavy lifting to pass legislation reversing the protections and he can both get credit for signing the bill and deflect criticism by not becoming the sole decision-maker changing the rules.
Such a move would also make it much tougher for pro-life advocates to undo the decision -- and Obama could also rely on Congress to reverse the Mexico City Policy.
In September, 2007, Sen. Barbara Boxer introduced an amendment to a spending bill that would have reversed the policy and the Senate approved it by a 53-41 percentage point margin.
The move didn't take effect only because President Bush threatened to veto any spending bill that removed the Mexico City Policy -- something Obama would unlikely do.
Being a typical lib,
he probably thinks you’ll get less of whatever you subsidize.
Like, if we give teenage unwed mothers money to take care of their babies, we’ll have fewer unwed teenage mothers.
Looks like he signed it out of the public eye. It’s signed, sealed and delivered. All this transparency rhetoric was and is crap — I hate cowards. If you’re going to do it, DO IT, and take the heat for it. Another disappointment to add to the rest.
For once, I wish someone would fail to live up to my expectations.
Elections really matter after all.
Just like the successful stage magician he will wait until there is something exciting worldwide going on and slip this in under the cover of darkness. Presto...the Chango we are to expect!
Shouldn't it be unconstitutional for a U.S. president to "issue an order" that unborn children in foreign countries be killed with funding from U.S. taxes? Particularly since they are deprived of life without due process of law. How could that possibly be legal or constitutional?
Does anyone else find it very creepy that this president is so eager to fund killing unborn children in foreign countries with U.S. tax dollars???
“Does anyone else find it very creepy that this president is so eager to fund killing unborn children in foreign countries with U.S. tax dollars???”
Yes. I also find Obama creepy.
I am going to pray that perhaps somehow, he’s had a change of heart. Maybe some of our prayers made it through.
I might be disappointed later, but for now, I’m glad he’s postponing an evil decision.
It’s no creepier than the zealous bloodlust with which the left insisted on killing Terri Schiavo.
There is no doubt in my mind - liberals do the bidding of Satan, most of them willingly, the rest are just useful idiots.
You beat me to that question. Even if abortion was right, which it ain’t, why are we paying for some foreigner to have one? The way these politicians squander our money is going to make my head explode one day.
You have old people choosing between food and medicine right here in this country. No, I’m not advocating government health care, just letting our people keep more of their hard-earned money to pay for their own.
Yep. It’s right at the end of that article. But since the article is mostly about Gitmo and security matters, maybe they got it wrong?
Meantime, if Obama gets congress to pass a bill and then signs it, that could be even worse, since it will be harder to undo, as this article points out. That way he shares the blame. And I’m not sure if there are enough Republican votes to stall it.
Well, that’s interesting! Maybe it was our prayers.
Actually, I think Obama and his handlers were surprised by how firm the bishops were in opposing his abortion plans and I think he wants to defuse the issue now. He’ll do it tomorrow or in a few days, because the NOW hags and a lot of leftist groups want it, but clearly he’s actually a little intimidated by the bishops.
After watching EWTN and seeing all the Catholic clergy and bishops processing out of the National Shrine last night, I can understand why he might be afraid. We’re his only opposition. I hope the bishops understand this and remain firm.
I think we are being fuzzed. He’s trying to confuse us.
Just assume he will do
- as he has done in the past
- as he promised his supporters
Hail the Abortionist-in-Chief.
Paging Doug Kmiec and all the other “CINOs” who spent the summer and fall preaching to the rest of us about their NEW Messiah.
The Pope ought to take the excommunications he’s lifting from the Lefebvrian bishops and dump them on these apostates.
One thing for the President, though, I guess this proves he’s really NOT a Muslim - but UCC all the way. The United Church of Christ hasn’t met an abortion yet that it didn’t want to promote!
I don’t understand why we’re sending ANY money overseas for anything of this sort anyway, abortion or no! Have PP send privately-funded condoms overseas if they want to send foreigners birth control, just keep my tax dollars out of it!
LQ
It would seem that the transfer of U.S. tax dollars to foreigners abroad for abortions, while American citizens are losing houses to foreclosures and going into debt to pay for college, OUGHT to be unconstitutional and illegal.
This for some population control agenda of a secretive Illuminati cabal that uses the federal government to promote that.
Thanks for the heads-up, NYer.
He postponed it for a day or two because of the March for Life rally. He’ll do it soon, make no mistake about it. Now we will see the damage he will do to society.
No ... Bill Clinton did the same thing on this very day. He overturned the previous order. Birds of a feather.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.